This Hallmark is not the same as the famous Hallmark Hall of Fame Productions.
These are the same people who did Noah's Ark several years ago and completely
ruined the story. When I researched them at that time, I found that the
Producer was a Muslim and he went more by the Koran's account than that of the
Bible. Appears he did it again with the Ten Commandments.
Oy!
Stephen

http://www.onemillionmoms.com/
Hallmark/ABC To Air The Ten Commandments April 9-10

American Family Association asked Dr. John Oswalt, Old Testament professor
at Wesley Biblical Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi, to review the new
Hallmark/ABC version of The Ten Commandments scheduled to air on April 9-10
on ABC.

If you are wanting to see a movie which is true to Scripture, then forget
this version of The Ten Commandments.

Below are Dr. Oswalt's comments. We felt his review might be of help in
making your decision to view or not to view the program.

Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman
American Family Association

P.S. Please forward this to your family and friends.
 
 

A review of Hallmark/ABC's The Ten Commandments

by John N. Oswalt
Research Professor of Old Testament
Wesley Biblical Seminary
Jackson, Mississippi

There is a lot to like about the movie.
* In many cases, such as the healing of the water at Marah, or the giving of
the manna, or the triumphing over the Egyptian diviners, the movie seems to
follow the Bible text closely and presents good visual images of these.

* The self-doubt of Moses and his inner struggles, especially in the early
going, are probably accurate.

* The rag-tag nature of the people and the vicious nature of Moses'
opponents is well portrayed. There is no attempt to downplay the miraculous
(in most cases).

That being said, I think the movie has a lot of problems.

The unnecessary departures from the Biblical story line:

* The Pharaoh did not make a one-time attempt to kill the boy babies because
of some silly prophecy. It was his settled policy that the mid-wives should
conduct post-birth abortions in order to destroy the Israelites as a people.
Aaron came out to meet Moses as directed by God and in confirmation of God's
word to Moses. There was no hocus-pocus about Joseph giving them the "I AM"
name in advance so that they could identify the deliverer.

* Moses knew that he was to take them to Sinai where they would worship God;
and they all knew where the Promised Land was.

* The Golden Calf is expressly said to have been a molded image which Aaron
cast from molten gold. They missed one of the best pieces of ironic humor in
the Bible when Aaron whines to Moses, "I put the gold in the fire, and out
came this calf!"

* The additions to the story (all of which are designed to make the Lord
[and Moses] look bad). Menrith, Zipporah's rejection (which is not what the
story implies), and the Hur incident are all used to say that God is harsh
and demanding and really doesn't care what he takes from us.
The omissions (which bother me most of all).

* The conflict of the plagues was not between Moses and Pharaoh; it was
between God and Pharaoh. This is lost by leaving out God's commands to Moses
regarding each of the plagues.

* The celebration by the sea recorded in Exodus 15. Moses was not weeping
over some half-brother. He was leading the Israelites in exultant praise of
God in one of the great hymns in all human history.

* The whole point of the Exodus is the Covenant. This was not a "bargain"
(the making of which takes about 4 minutes of the 180). The Covenant is a
detailed revelation of the character of God, of which the 10 Commandments
are a very brief summary. The people were carefully briefed on the nature of
what was expected of them, both verbally and in writing. And when they
agreed (Exodus 24) it was a very solemn ceremony, where they swore their
obedience in blood, calling down curses on themselves if they failed, and
culminating with Moses, Aaron, Joshua, and the 70 elders having a meal in
the presence of God. Thus, the Golden Calf incident was done in the full
knowledge of just what it was they were rejecting.

* The conversations between Moses and God in both Exodus 32 and 34, both of
which show God's compassion and his willingness to forgive and restore the
relationship.

* The Tabernacle (!!!), which is the climax of it all - God coming to take
up residence in their midst, not in curse, but in blessing.

Probably the reason the Covenant and the Tabernacle are left out is because
of the "scholars" the producers say they consulted with. Many scholars today
insist that the covenant and Tabernacle are much later additions to the
story. But, good grief, if they are going to go part way, why not go all the
way? Most OT scholars today, sad to say, not only deny those things, they
also deny that there was a Moses or an Exodus. So if you are going to do the
story, do it all the way or not at all.

The distortions

The Amalekites were raiders from the far north of the Sinai peninsula. They
had no settlements south of Mt. Sinai. Their presence that far south in the
peninsula was simply a sign that they saw the rag-tag crowd as "easy
pickings" for a lightning aggressive attack. This is why the Bible
pronounced a curse on them. They were not protecting their territory; they
were slaughtering people they (wrongly) believed were helpless.

It was the Levites who stood with Moses after the Golden Calf incident and
they went through their own tribe picking out those who had led the false
worship. The total killed (out of the huge group of people) was 3000. There
was nothing like the wholesale slaughter depicted in the movie. The incident
is only 3 verses long!